2. If you’re going to criticize, think a few steps into the future. You’re standing on the sidelines throwing mud at the first few moves of a chess match. Please, intelligently debate how bitcoin & new methods of payment/currency might play out, but this article is simply a weather report on what’s already happened. No value added.

It isn’t going to work. No matter how many ignorant journalists like this one you employee.

Especially ones that say dumb stuff like.

“an asset which is probably illegal under US law”
There is ZERO evidence of that.

]]>By: HeyJayhttp://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/07/02/financial-innovation-of-the-day-winklevii-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-47567
Thu, 04 Jul 2013 13:23:11 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22198#comment-47567Gotta say, this seems highly biased at this point – not what I’d expect from a Reuters journalist from what I remember of their reputation. The second you label something ‘stupid’ in an article, you’re dismissing all the value without actually discussing why.

Saying bitcoin will definitely be banned because of X in the states is incredibly short sighted – first, because it assumes the states regulatory laws rule the world, and second because you’re ruling out innovation as something we’ve outlawed. There are some very good arguments against banning bitcoin in the states – mostly that the arguments FOR banning it are silly in themselves. For instance, banning it because it can be used to launder money loses its steam when you consider that paper money can also be just as effectively used to launder money.

I wont get into every possible argument here but – as a reporter – you may want to soften your tone. Many products look to be on shaky ground when they first come out – until they are accepted and laws adapt to the new way of doing things. Has twenty years of software developments taught you nothing? I’m not sure of bitcoin myself, but I know better than to dismiss it outright.

Remind me again what currency HSBC was caught helping the drug cartels with, in the trillions? US DOLLARS. Still the currency of choice of everyone. Including the baddies.

This article totally ruined my Friday morning.

]]>By: CasualSophisthttp://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/07/02/financial-innovation-of-the-day-winklevii-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-47554
Wed, 03 Jul 2013 14:19:52 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=22198#comment-47554I’d like to (slightly) defend BlackRock here: the “alarming” dislocations from NAV weren’t — for the most part — in stock ETFs… they were in muni or other fixed income ETFs.

Liquidity and trading activity in some of the underlying is vary sparse, potentially on the order of one trade of size (or less!) per day. In that VERY PARTICULAR case, I could agree with BlackRock. Next time random series of municipality GO bonds trades, it will mark down 5 points and — like magic? — the NAV will come back in line without the price of the ETF “correcting” back to it.

I’m sorry, but this what is wrong with a lot of journalists – and you are no exception, unfortunately. If you would zoom out only a little bit you would see that the value of bitcoin has been rising exponentially for years – the Winklevii started buying when they were still in the single digits only a year ago. There have been three hype-cycles with a boom and bust, but the value has ended up higher than before every time. At the current price, the value of bitcoin has risen 600% throughout the past six months alone.

Yet, you choose to pick a specific period which perfectly fits your narrative.

Ah well, it’s all good. I still respect you, I just think you are very wrong on this specific subject, and I do suspect you will learn that some day. I just hope you will keep your mind open enough to maybe change it at some point in the future, instead of insisting to prove your own right by disseminating Fear, uncertainty and doubt for some time to go – like many would.